LSAT Lowdown For Beginners

The Law School Admission Test is a five-hour multiple-choice exam administered to crush the aspirations of twenty-somethings who grew up watching Law & Order thinking: That looks cool. I can do that. These twenty-somethings are largely wrong—they can’t do that. To make that point perfectly clear, the Law School Admission Committee designed the LSAT such that the average test taker (one who scores at the 50th percentile) can’t even complete the exam in the given time. As one might expect, half of all LSAT takers receive below average scores, and for that half, the chances of admission are not good. But not to worry, Law & Order fans, according to the Northeastern Illinois University website:

“There are at least two accredited law schools in the nation that will take almost anyone, offering them the chance at law school, but nothing more. These schools tend to flunk out 75% of their students after the first year, taking their tuition and sending them off. But if you can hack it, you can stay.”

Students with low LSAT scores can also enroll in non-accredited law schools, but I don’t know why they’d want to; most states—California being the most notable exception—won’t even allow graduates of non-accredited law schools to take the bar exam. According to Princeton Review, non-accredited law schools have other problems:

“Some critics argue that schools not accredited by the ABA are oriented less towards instilling students with a thorough knowledge of the law, and more towards teaching them how to pass the bar exam, supplying part-time professors and Spartan facilities. Two years ago, approximately eighty percent of students who attended ABA-approved schools in California passed the bar exam, versus approximately thirty percent for students who attended [California Bar Association]-approved schools, and about fifteen percent for those who went the non-accredited route.”

The Princeton Review also says, “Many people feel that they have to score at least a 160 to get into a ‘good’ law school. That’s pure myth.” That’s a gentle way of saying, If you don’t score at least a 160, you are a failure—not just as a prospective law student, but as a human being. Nobody could ever love an idiot like you. Unlike the SAT, if you get a bad LSAT score, you can’t take the test a second time without consequence. Law schools are given access to your complete record, not just your highest score.

The Law School Admission Test is a five-hour multiple-choice exam administered to crush the aspirations of twenty-somethings who grew up watching Law & Order thinking: That looks cool. I can do that. These twenty-somethings are largely wrong—they can’t do that. To make that point perfectly clear, the Law School Admission Committee designed the LSAT such that the average test taker (one who scores at the 50th percentile) can’t even complete the exam in the given time. As one might expect, half of all LSAT takers receive below average scores, and for that half, the chances of admission are not good. But not to worry, Law & Order fans, according to the Northeastern Illinois University website:

“There are at least two accredited law schools in the nation that will take almost anyone, offering them the chance at law school, but nothing more. These schools tend to flunk out 75% of their students after the first year, taking their tuition and sending them off. But if you can hack it, you can stay.”

Students with low LSAT scores can also enroll in non-accredited law schools, but I don’t know why they’d want to; most states—California being the most notable exception—won’t even allow graduates of non-accredited law schools to take the bar exam. According to Princeton Review, non-accredited law schools have other problems:

“Some critics argue that schools not accredited by the ABA are oriented less towards instilling students with a thorough knowledge of the law, and more towards teaching them how to pass the bar exam, supplying part-time professors and Spartan facilities. Two years ago, approximately eighty percent of students who attended ABA-approved schools in California passed the bar exam, versus approximately thirty percent for students who attended [California Bar Association]-approved schools, and about fifteen percent for those who went the non-accredited route.”

The Princeton Review also says, “Many people feel that they have to score at least a 160 to get into a ‘good’ law school. That’s pure myth.” That’s a gentle way of saying, If you don’t score at least a 160, you are a failure—not just as a prospective law student, but as a human being. Nobody could ever love an idiot like you. Unlike the SAT, if you get a bad LSAT score, you can’t take the test a second time without consequence. Law schools are given access to your complete record, not just your highest score.

Derek, I laid off you a long time ago, but I am yet to see you contribute much of anything worthwhile.

I am getting to being re-convinced that you are involved somehow and have an interest in the virtual LSAT proctor thing. Would you like to revisit some of those old threads?

Moenty,

If you can explain to me how an article stating that you need at least a 160 to be competitive in the admission process and a blog of random pictures of this guy's life, I will be happy to retract my previous statement.

This is pretty depressing for someone who is about to start prepping for June. Why is this called Law School for beginners? Also, I thought 150 was average... it really takes a 160 to get into a good school?

Derek, I laid off you a long time ago, but I am yet to see you contribute much of anything worthwhile.

I am getting to being re-convinced that you are involved somehow and have an interest in the virtual LSAT proctor thing. Would you like to revisit some of those old threads?

Moenty,

If you can explain to me how an article stating that you need at least a 160 to be competitive in the admission process and a blog of random pictures of this guy's life, I will be happy to retract my previous statement.

Well, that's not how I read it. I've read the guys blog some and he seems pretty smart and willing to share his perspective as well as good spirited entertainment. That passes my litmus test. Plus, his post in this thread is pretty darn accurate and with some mature perspective about things.

You might need to brush up on those RC skills a bit. Stuff like main points, putting stuff into context, big picture, etc.

I am not going to try to help you and explain it all out to you if you are just going to be recalcitrant.

Thanks, yo. I did mean it to be good-spirited... despite what most people on LSD seem to think...Yeah, thanks.